Ethical Clothing

lordgoat

Do many people take into account who makes the clothes they buy? Are they workers treated well etc?

Do people actively avoid TopShop/Top Man, Nike, Cons, Adidas etc? Who do you buy instead? Are they all the same?

Do you not give a **** so long as it looks good?

Puffin

Sadly, I think the manufacture of most clothes causes tears and environmental destruction. even if the machinists get decent wages and conditions, where do the fabric, thread, zippers etc come from?

I would always avoid big name brands like nike and topshop, but I also don’t feel obliged to go to brown thomas and spend a fortune on years-of-no-tax-bono-and-ali’s ‘ethical’ range.

I think the best thing you can do is to minimise the number/amount of clothes/bags/shoes etc you buy. I try to buy only few items a year/season and wear them for a years. If I want to wear something new, I try to come up with a new combination of existing clothes, rather than nipping into town and buying a load of new stuff.

Mind you that’s only my opinion

Pigletlover

I used to be opposed all these 'sweatshops' where Nike and other big brand clothes are manufactured until I heard someone argue a valid point. Sure these people may only be paid a few cents a day, which seems outrageous by our standards, but in the countries where these people live the cost of living is only a fraction of what it is here. If people working in factories were to be paid higher wages then doctors, nurses, teachers etc would also want to be paid more - why would they train to be a professional when they can work in a factory for the same pay? If governments can't afford to pay these higher wages to doctors, nurses, teachers etc then there will be a shortage of these professions as more and more people choose to work in factories.

While I don't believe Nike etc choose to set up their factories and pay low wages for the reasons I outlined above, I don't think that these factories are necessarily as bad as we were once lead to believe. I don't agree with child labour and the long hours and poor conditions that these people have to put up with but this isn't exclusive to factory workers. What I disagree with is the low cost of production and the prices that consumers are then charged.

Puffin

Hi piglet lover

I too love piglets.

But in terms of your argument- NO.

One of the key problems with huge US/UK etc companies setting up in developing nations is that they use local labour and resources but ship all the profit offshore. There have little if any permanent investment in the country. This means that while the some workers get paid (very basic) wages and can eat, most of the well paid workers, and those that have ‘career opportunities’ are foreigners who do a few years in the developing nation then take their money and skill back home.

And if there are any problems in the developing nation? The US/UK company just pulls the plug and moves out. While a few of the top managers might like to regale stories about how enriched they feel having been able to work with a ‘team’ in a fascinating foreign country, they have no genuine commitment to that country. Their ‘duty’ is to their boss, and to the shareholders. Think of all the tears when American pharmaceutical and IT companies pull out of Ireland.

Meanwhile, the situation discourages local development. Local people who want to start a company in their own country, employ locals at all levels of the company, keep the profits in the country and keep the company running despite local economic hiccups find they cannot compete with foreign companies. They cannot get workers, they cannot get resources, at times the big multinational companies actually pressure the local governments to clamp down on these local companies as they threaten the multinationals.

It’s not pretty, and many economists believe that developing nations would be a hell of a lot better off if we got the hell out of them and let them develop their own, sustainable food, clothing, manufacturing industries.

And in terms of alternatives? We have a real and achievable alternative- produce our clothes etc on our own country with our own workers paid at our own minimum wages. That’s what happened 100 years ago. Mind you, the price of clothes would go through the roof… everyone would throw a fit because they can’t buy a new little top every Saturday etc. So instead we continue to enslave developing nations, keep prices low and go shopping every week and try to fulfil our natural urge to achieve by wearing a new outfit to the pub that night.

phasers

I really don't care


I know I should, but I just don't

Tiriel

What ethical brands are there? Jigsaw is as far as I recall but unfortunatley not available in Dublin anymore.

lordgoat

Good to see so man responses!
I figured as much.

Good points puffin, i am trying to take that line and purchase fewer clothes/second hand clothes etc.

Piste

phasers wrote: »

I really don't care


I know I should, but I just don't

QFT.


Btw, topshop has a Fairtrade range, so you an shop there and not feel like you're just giving money to "The Man" or whatever.

lordgoat

Piste wrote: »

QFT.


Btw, topshop has a Fairtrade range, so you an shop there and not feel like you're just giving money to "The Man" or whatever.

That's possibly the most patronising thing i've ever heard.

It's the same company so all the profits go to 'the man'.
This token gesture is similar to the bronze viking boat on the south quays.
Yes here's a monument to where we buried our history under some apartments.

Fcuk Off


Rant not directed at poster btw

I only buy clothes that is made in Italy/US/UK.
Everything else is fairly common!Like!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

MayMay

Where can you get ethical clothing though? I'm sure more people would buy them if they knew where to.

lordgoat

There's different ways around it, you can buy second hand, or handmade irish clothes etc. Look into the shops you like, a simple google on them, etc.

I think the point is if it mattered to people they would do this, i'm not saying i do this but i would never buy nike/cons and i do get a lot of second hand clothes, but again you have to be realisitic too.

But one does what one can

MayMay

I would honestly like to try more, it has crossed my mind before but at the same time I want to wear nice clothes too you know....but it's something I am interested in.

Peyton Manning

I dont care. I'll buy a jacket made ethically and fair the same way I'l buy a jacket thats made by a 12 year old viatnamese kid working for 2p a day with a gun to his head - if it looks good that is.

lordgoat

MayMay wrote: »

I would honestly like to try more, it has crossed my mind before but at the same time I want to wear nice clothes too you know....but it's something I am interested in.

Ya that's pretty much what i feel too

Clare Bear

Is there such a thing as Fair Trade clothing like there is with food? I'm not a big label buyer but at the same time I honestly have no idea how my clothes are made/by who etc...it's something I'd be interested in but there's very little info out there.

Parnassia

Clare Bear wrote: »

Is there such a thing as Fair Trade clothing like there is with food? I'm not a big label buyer but at the same time I honestly have no idea how my clothes are made/by who etc...it's something I'd be interested in but there's very little info out there.

Yes. Just google 'fair trade clothing'.

LuckyStar

Slate me if you want, but I never look for fairtrade/ethical clothes, I buy clothes I like. As bad as the labour is it has to be better than these workers having no job at all.

I would not buy Bono's line purely because I hate him, he goes around giving out about third world poverty as he flies over to these countries in a private jet paid for out of his millions. If he is so concerned he should put his money where his mouth is more. What kinds of factories are his CDs, tour merchandise, guitars made in?

Macha

So your hatred for Bono can influence what clothes you buy but concern for the welfare of individuals (many of them children) can't. Nice.

LuckyStar

Well what do you propose, that the factories should be shut down? What are these people going to do for money then?

Clare Bear

In fairness I'd rather go naked than have to wear Bono's clothes...

lordgoat

LuckyStar wrote: »

Well what do you propose, that the factories should be shut down? What are these people going to do for money then?

That wasn't the point of the thread. But... What is wrong in the majority of cases is working conditions not necessarily the wages. Proposals - Better working conditions,no 12-14 hour working days, maybe no child labour, ?

It you are going to give an opinion at least make it a an informeed one. Not - i hate bono.

The reason i started the thread was to see if many people actually were bothered where there clothes came from and did it influence their decision when purchasing.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

lordgoat

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't really know enough to argue the point properly but i seriously doubt that sustaing poor working conditions is a way of breaking the chain. If you gave me some sources to back up any of your claims i'd read them but just saying them as matter of fact makes me to just ignore them. Sorry.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

lordgoat

Wikipedia? Are you serious? You're citing a pro-sweatshop article from there?

So you think 80years of hard labor a fair price to pay? Be thanks you weren't born in South Korea then.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Macha

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Interesting point.

I would argue, however, that an additional reason why your uncle has a better day than your great grandfather is the advance of technology. The same technology (more or less) is available to all countries these days in the area of clothes and general consumer manufacturing. In addition there are stronger working rights today.

Countries such as Vietnam and China have an advantage over more "developed" (for want of a better word) countries because wages are lower (as is the cost of living). As a result, a worker doing the exact same job in Vietnam will cost less to the multinational than a worker in, say, Ireland.

Factor in the cheaper costs of rent, electricity, etc etc and you can see why it is cheaper to manufacture in places like China and Vietnam than in Ireland.

BUT, the terrible working conditions in these countries (ie, sweatshops) are nothing more than an attempt by companies to maximise profits by exploiting the weak human rights of these countries.

It is not necessary because the products are already being produced more cheaply than in the West. It is pure greed.

It is also a symptom of our obsession with getting a bargain, getting something for the cheapest price. Take food for example - in the 1960s we spent approximately 30% of our disposable income on food. Now it is closer to 15% but by the whinging and moaning at the small rise in dairy and wheat product prices, you would think we pay more!

We have lost sight of quality in the quest for quantity. Why buy 1 fairtrade T-shirt when you can buy 10 for the same price in Pennys?

I do not agree that these countries "have" to go through this barbaric phase to arrive at a more advanced economy.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Macha

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hah yes, this thread wouldn't be out of place an Ethical forum (if there was one).

Apologies but I don't think I understand the exact wording of your argument. As you say yourself, there is always someone willing to do it cheaper to undercut the competition but that's where employment rights kick in (in the West). You just need to work in a pub or restaurant, to see that Western countries are not immune from exploiting workers, when these rights are capable of being more loosely observed. (or maybe it was just me that was made to work 23 days in a row, with a few 12 hour shifts thrown in for the laugh)

In my opinion, the few things that stop widespread exploitation of workers in Ireland are:

- coverage in the media.
- widespread public intolerance of exploitation.
- employment legislation that is enforced.

The difference in countries like Vietnam is that the above items do not exist, or do not exist to the same extent.

Fundamentally your argument is that the market is king. And my argument is that the market is fundamentally flawed and intervention is vital to ensure human rights.

I think...it's late

lilRedSmurf

I mean no offence to anyone here but my God some of you come from a seriously bubble wrapped existance.

I dont come from an Irish background. I've seen the state of what goes on in places like india and africa first hand and i think if some of you here had seen what I've seen you'd be singing a very different tune.

In places like India and Tanzania parents sell their children to sweat shops not knowing the consequences of their actions and often having no other alternative to keep the rest of their family alive. These kids dont get paid, they barely get a meal. They work 14+ hour days sewing the sequins onto all those lovely tops that you wear till their fingers bleed and then get beaten when they bloody the merchandise. They usually get trapped there for the rest of their lives however short they may be.

I dont care about the so called economic necsessity of sweat shops.
I care about human beings.

speedboatchase

"I dont care about the so called economic necsessity of sweat shops.
I care about human beings."


*GROAN* Do everything a favour Geldof, adopt an African baby, I really don't see what you're doing on a fashion forum if you can't see that the majority of fashion followers aren't bleeding heart liberals, and more power to them. Funny you mentioned India, one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a future superpower all thanks to Globalisation and free trade - I guess you'd prefer if they went back living in blissful harmony before the evil white man came.


There is no such thing as a sweatshop, its just another example of "white man guilt" when really we've done nothing wrong. The whole child prostitution argument is bullcrap too, facts please?

EVERY country goes through a "sweatshop" phase, it's how countries industrialise. Many of us had "made in Taiwan" toys when we were kids but after about 20 years of mass-producing goods for us they're no turning into an electronics powerhouse, with their brands that they ship worldwide. Hell, even the biggest building in the world is in Taipei. Pretty good going for them.

If you've ever seen a Nike factory in Vietnam, then you'd know that the workers there are better paid and working in better conditions than anyone in a Vietnamese-owned factory. Do you prefer they all in work in paddyfields once Nike is closed down? These countries needs multinationals just as much as we do. My county, Kildare, would be destroyed if HP and Intel left.

People who hate McDonalds in China or Nike in Vietnam are the kinda people who view these countries as museums that should never touched by us. Well, simple fact is people like eating at McDonalds and the Vietnamese would rather work at a American-owned factory than anything else. Watch Johann Nordbergs study on Google Video, it'll open your eyes.

Ethical clothing is a load of bull****, reminds me of people who'd say "buy irish toys" when all we were producing was rocking chairs and jigsaw puzzles. Survival of the fittest, who dares wins, I'll buy whatever product I want as its my consumer right and I certainly wouldn't take "fashion advice" from ethical clothing proponents who would rather search charity shops and dress like their parents 30 years ago

lilRedSmurf

speedboatchase wrote: »

Funny you mentioned India, one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a future superpower all thanks to Globalisation and free trade - I guess you'd prefer if they went back living in blissful harmony before the evil white man came.

ahem.. I'm am Indian and it certainly is one of the fastest growing economies in the world but if you walk down the street there you'll see lepers, men, women and children begging and living in the street cos only about 15% of indians dont live in poverty.


Like i said bubble wrapped existance...

speedboatchase

Well obviously thats Topmans fault, right? If only there were more charity shops in India Although I did find this chestnut, should cheer you up:

The Planning Commission has estimated that 27.5% of the Indian population was living below the poverty line in 2004–2005, down from 51.3% in 1977–1978, and 36% in 1993-1994

Maybe just ride out that globalisation a little longer?

lilRedSmurf

speedboatchase wrote: »

The Planning Commission has estimated that 27.5% of the Indian population was living below the poverty line in 2004–2005, down from 51.3% in 1977–1978, and 36% in 1993-1994

Estimates of the poverty line according to your info are based on a norm of 2400 calories per capita per day for rural areas and 2100 per capita per day for urban areas. This goes back to the 1970s; at that time, they decided to measure poverty levels by considering a minimum nutritional level. More accurately, the measure was the amount of money required to buy food equivalent to this nutritional level. If you earned more than this amount, you were above the poverty line.


In real life terms they earn less than 50cent a day

speedboatchase

And where are we going with this argument now? So you're saying that poverty isn't decreasing whilst India is getting richer? Right...

Anyways I wrote a lot more than that one statement and you should have a look. But in any case, its your prerogative to never buy brand goods, whether they be fashion or otherwise, and to live in a house where your children play on Irish rocking chairs and listen to Ronnie Drew.

As I'm sure you're aware though, you will never change anyones opinion or make a dent in such brand's yearly profits, so really I don't see the point of this thread. Its clearly not coming from someone who has an interest in fashion.

lilRedSmurf

speedboatchase wrote: »

As I'm sure you're aware though, you will never change anyones opinion or make a dent in such brand's yearly profits, so really I don't see the point of this thread. Its clearly not coming from someone who has an interest in fashion.

Actually i think that its great that a thread like this has turned up here. It means that people with an interest in fashion are thinking about issues like these and sharing their views whatever they may be, which in itself its a great thing. Sharing ideas are what forums are suppossed to be about in the first place arent they?

I'm not out to change anyone's opinion but all anyone can ask is that someone consider a point of view other then their own. If they change their opinion that is their choice, if they dont they dont and life goes on.

LuckyStar

lordgoat wrote: »

I don't really know enough to argue the point properly but i seriously doubt that sustaing poor working conditions is a way of breaking the chain.

You don't know enough to argue the point but you tell me I should be making informed opinions...

So you think better working conditions would be good. Yeah, it sounds good. But if an improvement in working conditions means less hours worked then there will be less stock produced. At the end of the day if improved working conditions in one country compromises a company's business, they will just take their factory to the next country. Hey presto, hundreds if not thousands of people have lost their jobs. At the end of the day these companies are out to make money. That is business.

The factory jobs may not be great but have you looked at the other options for these workers? Would you rather these people went into prostitution or starved?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Siogfinsceal

I buy my clothes mainly from penneys or H&M. Why? because I dont believe in spending a fortune on big brands (especially for work clothes) and these clothes look good and dont cost me too much.
Yes there are irish made goods on the market but they, like most fair trade stuff cost more than the norm and I dont believe in paying through the nose for something just because its supposedly fairer.
Ad someone else said the top shop fair trade range will still bring in profit for top shop. I dont shop in top shop because I believe their clothes are over priced for teh quality you get, same with river island

Macha

speedboatchase wrote: »

*GROAN* Do everything a favour Geldof, adopt an African baby, I really don't see what you're doing on a fashion forum if you can't see that the majority of fashion followers aren't bleeding heart liberals, and more power to them. Funny you mentioned India, one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a future superpower all thanks to Globalisation and free trade - I guess you'd prefer if they went back living in blissful harmony before the evil white man came.

I don't understand how you can equate concern for the working conditions of Indians with wanting them to go back to "blissful harmony". I think you're letting your preconcieved ideas cloud what you're saying. No one has said that India was in any way a paradise before globalisation but if you in any way question the pillage of their economy by the British empire, you need a history lesson. Or you could read this:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Germs-Steel-Fates-Human-Societies/dp/0393317552/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196350833&sr=8-2

speedboatchase wrote: »

There is no such thing as a sweatshop, its just another example of "white man guilt" when really we've done nothing wrong. The whole child prostitution argument is bullcrap too, facts please?

As I said earlier, not caring about people in sweatshops is one thing - denying they exist at all is another. The worst type of ignorance is the self-imposed ignorance of those who just don't want to know.

Here are just a few links to stories about child labour:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1207349.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6747449.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/archive/970385.stm

speedboatchase wrote: »

EVERY country goes through a "sweatshop" phase, it's how countries industrialise. Many of us had "made in Taiwan" toys when we were kids but after about 20 years of mass-producing goods for us they're no turning into an electronics powerhouse, with their brands that they ship worldwide. Hell, even the biggest building in the world is in Taipei. Pretty good going for them.

I suppose next you'll say that slavery was a necessary step on the road the developed economies of today.

speedboatchase wrote: »

If you've ever seen a Nike factory in Vietnam, then you'd know that the workers there are better paid and working in better conditions than anyone in a Vietnamese-owned factory. Do you prefer they all in work in paddyfields once Nike is closed down? These countries needs multinationals just as much as we do. My county, Kildare, would be destroyed if HP and Intel left.

So does that mean if Intel and HP decided to pull out unless all their employees took a 50% pay cut and worked 14 hours a day you would be OK with that?

speedboatchase wrote: »

People who hate McDonalds in China or Nike in Vietnam are the kinda people who view these countries as museums that should never touched by us. Well, simple fact is people like eating at McDonalds and the Vietnamese would rather work at a American-owned factory than anything else. Watch Johann Nordbergs study on Google Video, it'll open your eyes.

Again, you seem to be confused by your preconceptions. No one here is talking about McDonalds. And no one here is talking about putting these countries in museums.

speedboatchase wrote: »

Ethical clothing is a load of bull****, reminds me of people who'd say "buy irish toys" when all we were producing was rocking chairs and jigsaw puzzles. Survival of the fittest, who dares wins, I'll buy whatever product I want as its my consumer right and I certainly wouldn't take "fashion advice" from ethical clothing proponents who would rather search charity shops and dress like their parents 30 years ago

You're really laying on the prejudices here now..

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/ethicalliving/2007/11/real_treats_that_dont_cost_the.html

I am quite a fashion person and I wouldn't have a problem buying any of the things on this page. And they're ethical (shock!).

As for your 'survival of the fittest' all I can say is you don't even realise how lucky you are to be sitting in your apartment/house/office, at a computer, knowing where your next meal is. You talk as if you personally are responsible for your priviliged position, instead of realising it's just an accident of birth that you aren't sitting in a sweatshop cranking out plastic toys for 15 hours a day.

Ever heard of the expression 'There, but for the grace of God, go I"??

Apologies for the harsh words but this sort of attitude just sickens me.

lilRedSmurf

All i can say is here here...

Macha

And for those who are interested:

http://www.fashion-conscience.com/

lilRedSmurf

The thing that i wonder about is when in earlier posts, where people have covered the economics behind all this, that nothing about the fact that demand is a massive controlling factor in the market seems to come up.

A few years back it was next to impossible to source certain organic or fairtrade goods. Now for example green shopping is avilable on msn....
The market is being flooded with green/organic/carbon neutral/sustainable etc alternatives.

Why? Because its what more and more people want and the market has done what markets do... listen to what consumers want and gives it to them.

speedboatchase

I wrote a really long bloody reply and when I went to send it I had to sign in so I lost the whole damn thing!

But suffice to say, neither of us are going to see each point of view and no, I'm not a pro-slavery proponent of the British Empire. Just watch some of this documentary if you have time

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5633239795464137680&q=globalisation+is+good&total=176&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0


Bloody raging that I lost the original reply:mad:

MayMay

speedboatchase wrote: »

I wrote a really long bloody reply and when I went to send it I had to sign in so I lost the whole damn thing!

But suffice to say, neither of us are going to see each point of view and no, I'm not a pro-slavery proponent of the British Empire. Just watch some of this documentary if you have time

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5633239795464137680&q=globalisation+is+good&total=176&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0


Bloody raging that I lost the original reply:mad:

If you had pressed page back you could have saved it.

speedboatchase

Ah its pointless though, this is a nice, friendly forum and a topic like this, no matter your best intentions will bring out the worst in people as the subject is so divisive. The link I provided is what helped me come to my conclusions amongst a few other books on the subject, so it sums up my thoughts without getting into an argument. And like I said, since this argument won't reach any kind of conclusion its probably for the best

lordgoat

LuckyStar wrote: »

You don't know enough to argue the point but you tell me I should be making informed opinions...

So you think better working conditions would be good. Yeah, it sounds good. But if an improvement in working conditions means less hours worked then there will be less stock produced. At the end of the day if improved working conditions in one country compromises a company's business, they will just take their factory to the next country. Hey presto, hundreds if not thousands of people have lost their jobs. At the end of the day these companies are out to make money. That is business.

The factory jobs may not be great but have you looked at the other options for these workers? Would you rather these people went into prostitution or starved?

Ah i see your point now. Fcuk the morals does it make any money?

You seem ok to trade one form of wrong for another. While i don't think either is acceptable. Taconnol made some great points and seems more informed than i, yet you chose to ignore them?

LuckyStar

lordgoat wrote: »

Ah i see your point now. Fcuk the morals does it make any money?

You seem ok to trade one form of wrong for another. While i don't think either is acceptable. Taconnol made some great points and seems more informed than i, yet you chose to ignore them?

Meh. Maybe you should take your aggression to somewhere it might actually matter, like a child labour protest. Toodles for now.

lordgoat

LuckyStar wrote: »

Meh. Maybe you should take your aggression to somewhere it might actually matter, like a child labour protest. Toodles for now.

Aggression?

Possible your most insightful point though. I love how you've ignored all other arguments.Speaks volumes.

But as you say, meh